This week, we're going to close out the legal talk with some informative podcasts that any entertainment business or brand should check out. Each podcast focuses on intellectual property (IP) issues, including copyright, patent, and trademark law, as well as regulations surrounding trade secrets. A nice plus is that they all relate to entertainment software. Really, would it make sense if they didn't?
The first podcast is from attorneys Gordon Firemark and Tamara Bennet and is part of the Entertainment Law Update series of podcasts. I will warn you right now that it is quite lengthy, but still worth listening to if your a judicial scholar or entertainment professional. In this podcast, they cover numerous different cases and issues, with topics ranging from misappropriation of hot news to trademark abandonment. Also, they discuss the case of Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Association (I encourage you to read this opinion; it's long, but incredibly entertaining and informative), which concluded in a ruling that added video games to the list of mediums protected by free speech. That's a big deal, folks. But what really caught my attention was their discussion of the new anti-SLAPP law in Texas. First of all, good for you, Texas! What an anti-SLAPP law does is allow defendants involved in an IP lawsuit relating to freedom of expression to have the case dismissed before incurring hefty attorney fees. While the first amendment should suffice in squashing any litigation pertaining to freedom of expression, it's still always nice to save money!
The next podcast is a Lawyer2Lawyer podcast from attorneys Peter Goplerud and Clay Travis, and focuses on the suit brought against EA Sports and the NCAA by college quarterback Sam Keller in 2009. In this case, Sam Keller decided to sue EA Sports for using college athletes' likenesses in their NCAA video games. It's an interesting argument, because the NCAA has regulations against the exploitation of amateur college athletes for financial gain, yet they advocate EA's exploitation of these same athletes at the same time. At the time of this case, there was a lot of speculation as to how this might impact EA Sports and the NCAA if Keller happened to win the battle. Let's face it; we play these games because they put us in the shoes of some pretty awesome athletes that actually exist. Even the athletes themselves enjoy playing the games for this very reason. So we know that EA Sports would have a much more difficult time selling their games, and the NCAA would have to slap themselves on the wrist for violating their own regulations. More importantly, the colleges would have to begin taking some of the power back from the NCAA, to which they have basically given all control over to in regards to college athleticism. I'll just spoil the case for you right now: it was thrown out on the grounds of transformative fair use (Note the references to freedom of expression and Brown v. EMA in the article by Eriq Gardner). You can actually listen to EA's attorney bringing all of her legal know-how to bear right here.
The final podcast is a Suffolk University podcast with Peter Lando concerning IP issues relating to software. In this podcast, Lando discusses a number of different IP issues pertaining to software innovations, but the issue that really stands out is that of using open source in your source code programming. Essentially, this means trouble for any business intending to protect their software with patents, copyrights, or as trade secrets. The lesson to be learned here: be wary with works for hire, because some source code programmers may come with a mental vault full of open source code. This will essentially render your source code outside the realm of protection, even if a good portion of it is original. On the plus side, the USPTO is shifting towards a software mindset, and bigger companies are even going as far as patenting snippets of software code to streamline source code programming and gain an advantage over the competition. Also, he briefly discusses the case of Aristocrat Technologies, and the means-plus-function procedure that has been implemented to make it more difficult to secure patents with software.
There they are. I encourage you to check them out, because they are jam-packed with tips for business success to those with the right ears to hear them. For anyone interested in starting a business that will employ copyright, patent, and trademark issues (such as myself), they can be incredibly helpful. Case in point: I'm currently working on a business plan for a talent management agency that will employ proprietary software as a part of the management process. Lando's discussion about software and intellectual property, particularly the section pertaining to source code, was extremely informative for me. And, of course, the freedom of expression issues brought up by the Entertainment Law Update and Lawyer2Lawyer podcasts convinced me to delve into the first amendment and gain a more appropriate understanding of it. Honestly, I think everyone should be well versed with the Bill of Rights by now. I hope these legal talks have been helpful!
No comments:
Post a Comment